A. Defendant 1) Some of the submission of a false tax invoice and a list of total tax invoices by a false seller did not actually engage in a transaction, but the remainder is not the degree of profit-making but the Defendant actually supplied goods to a customer. Thus, the false statement is not made.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty as to this part of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

2) The sentence of the lower court (a year and six months of imprisonment and a fine of KRW 440 million) that is unfair for sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court also argued the same purport as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court determined that the Defendant issued a false tax invoice for profit-making purposes and prepares a false list of accounts of separate sources of sales and submits a false list of accounts to the Government, and rejected the Defendant’s assertion.

In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court, the Defendant stated in the Prosecutor’s Office that “In order to maintain transaction relations with the customer companies and prevent the levy of comprehensive income tax, the Defendant issued the instant false tax account statement” and in addition to the facts that there are no circumstances to suspect the voluntary gender or credibility of such statements, this part of the facts charged may be fully convicted.

Therefore, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there are errors in the misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. The instant crime of determining the illegality of sentencing by the Defendant and the Prosecutor is to issue a false tax invoice without real transactions and to make a false list of the total tax invoices for each purchaser and seller.